Glossary entry (derived from question below)
English term or phrase:
This Count does not sound in fraud.
Dutch translation:
Dit ten laste gelegde feit heeft geen betrekking op fraude
May 9, 2009 01:16
15 yrs ago
English term
This Count does not sound in fraud.
English to Dutch
Law/Patents
Law (general)
securities USA, Complaint
Part of a Complaint (conclusie van antwoord) voor het Federale Hof in de V.S. inzake frauduleus handelen van een onderneming m.b.t. het uitbrengen van de prospectus/registratieverklaring. "Count" is het door eisers aan gedaagden ten laste gelegde feit.
Mijn vertaling: Dit Feit heeft niet de schijn van fraude.
I have never encountered this phrase before...
Thanks for your help!
Mijn vertaling: Dit Feit heeft niet de schijn van fraude.
I have never encountered this phrase before...
Thanks for your help!
Proposed translations
(Dutch)
| 3 | Dit ten laste gelegde feit heeft geen betrekking op fraude |
Ron Willems
|
Proposed translations
6 hrs
Ron Willems
Netherlands
Netherlands
Native in Dutch
Specializes in field
Netherlands
Your IT translation partner for Dutch
Native in: Dutch (Variant: Netherlands) 
Works in: English to Dutch
Related KudoZ points
:
262
English term (edited):
This Count does not sound in fraud
Selected
Dit ten laste gelegde feit heeft geen betrekking op fraude
zo te zien aan de twee onderstaande voorbeelden, is het zoiets: gebaseerd zijn op, betrekking hebben op, betreffen...
A complaint alleging fraud must provide "the who, what, when, where, and how . . . A claim that sounds in fraud - in other words, one that is premised upon a course of fraudulent conduct - can implicate Rule 9(b)'s heightened pleading requirements." (internal cites and quotes omitted).
http://overregd.lindquist.com/2007/02/articles/litigation-tr...
Therefore, if a Section 11 or Section 12(a)(2) claim sounds in fraud (for example, "the registration statement was inaccurate and misleading" or "the prospectus or registration statement contained untrue statements of material facts" or "materially false and misleading statements were made"), the Second Circuit requires the plaintiff to: (1) specify the statements that the plaintiff contends were fraudulent; (2) identify the speaker; (3) state whether and when the statements were made; and (4) explain why the statements were fraudulent.
http://www.omm.com/newsroom/publication.aspx?pub=438
A complaint alleging fraud must provide "the who, what, when, where, and how . . . A claim that sounds in fraud - in other words, one that is premised upon a course of fraudulent conduct - can implicate Rule 9(b)'s heightened pleading requirements." (internal cites and quotes omitted).
http://overregd.lindquist.com/2007/02/articles/litigation-tr...
Therefore, if a Section 11 or Section 12(a)(2) claim sounds in fraud (for example, "the registration statement was inaccurate and misleading" or "the prospectus or registration statement contained untrue statements of material facts" or "materially false and misleading statements were made"), the Second Circuit requires the plaintiff to: (1) specify the statements that the plaintiff contends were fraudulent; (2) identify the speaker; (3) state whether and when the statements were made; and (4) explain why the statements were fraudulent.
http://www.omm.com/newsroom/publication.aspx?pub=438
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "very good, thanks!"
Something went wrong...